Norwalk committee moves to implement housing action plan, readies affordable-housing trust appointments

The Norwalk Common Council’s Affordable Housing Ad Hoc Committee on Feb. 20 discussed how to move the city’s recently completed Affordable Housing Action Plan into implementation, including asking the mayor’s office to consider a dedicated staff position, researching targeted tax-incentive authority, planning a public forum in May and forming the seven-member committee that will allocate funds from the newly established Affordable Housing Trust.

The committee’s work aims to convert the plan’s recommendations — many of which rely on staff capacity or interagency coordination — into concrete next steps. Committee members said they want low‑hanging projects advanced quickly while staff and leadership pursue longer-term changes such as zoning updates, tax-incentive rules and state-level legislative changes.

“I'm very pleased that the city has an ad hoc, housing, affordable housing, committee… but we could do better, and we have to be more aggressive and target,” said Diane Loricello, a Norwalk resident, urging the committee to inventory commercial sites and promote accessory dwelling units (ADUs). “Of course, I am a big proponent of detached ADUs.”

Why it matters: Committee members described Norwalk’s rental market as tight and said delays in staffing or coordination risk leaving the plan on a shelf. The group identified three near-term priorities: (1) pressing the mayor’s office about a staff position to carry out plan items, (2) standing up the Affordable Housing Trust committee so funds can be allocated, and (3) pursuing a short list of legislative and regulatory items that could be advanced within months.

Staff capacity and a short timetable

Committee leaders said many action-plan items are contingent on staff capacity and urged a rapid decision about whether to request a new staff position before the city’s budget is finalized. “We have a whopping five days before our budget cap vote. Should we be making any — or should we, as a committee, be making a push on a request before the budget is finalized to get a staff member in to carry forward a number of these things?” the committee chair said during the meeting. Several members supported submitting a request now to put the idea on the mayor’s radar even if funding is not immediately available.

The chair offered to draft a job description drawn from the plan’s priority tasks and circulate it to committee members for review. Committee members also recommended meeting departments identified in the action plan — including the Norwalk Housing Authority and the Redevelopment Agency — and asking them to report progress and needs at future ad hoc meetings.

Affordable Housing Trust: amount, committee and eligibility

City staff reported the Affordable Housing Trust balance at roughly $2,000,000. “It's a little over $2,000,000, I believe, at this point,” said Steve Clapin (city staff), who also noted the trust’s statutory purpose: construction, rehabilitation and related work for affordable housing and the need to define application criteria under the ordinance.

The ordinance requires the Common Council to appoint a seven-member trust committee: two council members, a designee from Planning and Zoning, a designee from Community Services, and three public members. The ordinance specifies that among the three public members one must be a renter and one a homeowner who live in affordable housing (the ordinance defines affordable housing there as households at or below 60% of state median income). Committee members said they will recommend candidates to council leadership and hope to have appointments considered for the first March meeting so the trust can begin evaluating requests.

Committee members underscored that any city funds invested should be protected by deed restrictions or similar requirements so rehabilitated or subsidized units remain affordable over time.

Developer incentives, workforce housing and tax authority

Members pressed staff about the plan’s assumption that 10% workforce/affordable units is what “the market can bear.” Several members expressed skepticism and asked the committee to invite the plan’s consultant and local developers to explain the underlying analysis. Staff said the consultant’s estimate appears in the plan and recommended a follow-up meeting for detailed review.

The chair also asked the committee to investigate a targeted municipal tax-incentive authority under Connecticut General Statutes §12-65b. Committee members said that statute could permit more narrowly targeted incentives than the city’s existing enterprise-zone seven-year abatement, which some members said is too broad for achieving specific workforce-housing outcomes.

Legislative and regulatory items

City staff said they are preparing three legislative proposals to pursue in the near term: a change intended to make condominium ownership more accessible, a statute modeled on a Massachusetts practice to give housing authorities a right of first refusal on tax-delinquent properties, and a tax-incentive to encourage grocery stores in underserved areas. Staff also said they will research adjustments to workforce-housing rules that would incentivize units at 80–90% of area median income even if such units would not count toward the city’s statutory affordable‑housing percentage under Conn. Gen. Stat. §8-30g.

Centralized vacancy list and application streamlining

Committee members raised the absence of a centralized, up-to-date inventory of affordable-unit openings. Staff said maintaining a real-time central list had proven cumbersome and required frequent monthly updates from many property managers. The action plan recommends streamlining applications and creating a single waiting list; committee members flagged that step as a staffing-dependent priority.

Community outreach and May forum

Staff and committee members proposed hosting a public forum in May to explain existing housing resources, funding options and potential public-private partnerships. The forum would include presentations from housing providers (for example, the Norwalk Housing Authority and local nonprofit providers) with breakout tables for residents to get targeted assistance, modeled on previous city “enforcement” forums.

Other ideas and inventory of city-owned sites

Public commenters and committee members urged the committee to produce an inventory of commercial properties that could be repurposed for housing — including malls and underutilized office buildings — and to consider small-scale “middle‑housing” solutions such as townhomes and ADUs. Diane Loricello urged “a multiphase plan, going out 5 or 10 years” and said many single-family homeowners, particularly seniors, need outreach to understand ADU options.

Meeting actions

- Motion to accept the January 23 meeting minutes: moved by Council Member Dunn; vote recorded as 5 in favor; outcome: approved. - Motion to adjourn at 7:03 p.m.: moved by Council Member Dunn; committee chair called for the vote and indicated the meeting adjourned after the motion was seconded; outcome: approved.

What’s next

Committee members asked staff to circulate the trust balance and the ordinance language, to draft a proposed job description for a housing implementation staff position, to prepare language for the targeted tax-incentive review under Conn. Gen. Stat. §12-65b, and to schedule follow-up meetings that include the housing authority, redevelopment agency and the plan consultant. The committee also targeted the first or second March meeting for potential trust appointments and to review any near-term zoning amendments.

The committee’s discussion reflects an emphasis on pairing immediate “low-hanging” actions that can be advanced by staff with a longer-term strategy for city-owned properties, tax incentives and state-level advocacy.